I went over to the British Spectator to see what they had to say about the Muslims shooting up Paris. The last I checked it was a respectably conservative opinion site. It used to be that “respectable” meant non-fringe, but these days it means not threatening to the status quo. Sure enough, this is their first instinct.

The Muslim Council of France, and of Britain, have denounced today’s attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo. As they know, one of the aims of the jihadis is to try to speak for Islam – but they have been joined in their condemnation by hundreds of Muslims on Twitter. Here are some of them.

It then goes on to list a dozen or so tweets from Muslims saying they are unhappy with the attack in Paris. As is always the case these days, the truth lies in the comment sections of respectable sites. The one at the very top nails it. When Muslims get their feelings hurt, they manage to have mass rallies and mass killings. After something like this, they can only muster some mild rebukes on twitter.

The fact that the first instinct of the Spectator is to insulate Muslims against the great mythical backlash that never comes is telling. A normal person can be forgiven for wondering whose side they are on here. It’s tempting to think that maybe it is just a subtle way to get readers to post comments, a form of click bait. The readers get to say what the writers and publishers are afraid to post.

That’s a fantasy. Even if true it just shows that the people allegedly leading the charge against the Left are simply to afraid to fight. What’s the point of supporting these folks if when it comes time to choose a side, they will join the opposition?

The problem we have in the Anglo-sphere is that the Anglos have no tribune. There’s no one willing to represent the stale, pale males who created civilization. There’s no one willing to defend civilization. If Charles Martel were alive today, the Frogs would have packed him off to sensitivity training or worse.